Something simply *has* to change in politics

[BornRuff]

Wrong, they get a percentage of RRSP matched contributions PLUS 13% of their salary in cash.

Lol, your being pretty nit picky for someone who thought they had a pension plan like 2 posts ago.

Sure, technically they can spend the money on whatever they want. That is the nature of not having a pension plan. They give you this money with the intention of you saving it for retirement, but in the end, you can do what you want with it and they have no obligation to do anything more for you if you squander it.

Because she failed to fulfill her side of the agreement with any responsibility or integrity. Call it a penalty for failing to fulfill her contract if it makes it easier to swallow (Then again, by the way you defend politicians I would imagine you swallow pretty good already.). Call it restitution for the $1.3 million the taxpayers now have to give her staff because she failed to fulfill her contract.

Lol, can you show me this contract you speak of?

The fact is that she didn't breach any contract in this regard. There is no contract saying that if she spends more than people think is right, she gets all of her RRSP contributions clawed back.

As far as I am concerned her complete lack of fiscal responsibility with public funds constitutes corruption. She was/is a failure and it is costing Alberta taxpayers a fortune, she needs to pay, not walk away scott-free and into a lucrative private sector job provided by one of the corporations she gave our money too.

Oh, so it was within the rules these f*ckers made for themselves and to you that makes it all ok? You really are dumb c*nt! That is the EXACT reason I propose they should not be able to introduce or pass any legislation pertaining to their own salaries, benefits or rules they operate under. Can you say "conflict of interest"?

Exactly what rule did Redford change that allowed her to do this?

You are pretty uppity for someone who has been factually wrong on pretty much every point that you have brought up.

That's another kettle of fish to fry. You forgot to mention they get that for 1.5 terms in office (six years of service). That sh*t all needs to go away too. Let them live on the $16000 maximum pension benefit (CPP, OAS & GIS combined) that citizens get from the govt this year.

Sure, whatever. I don't care.

Hmmm! $14k to use govt plane to go to Ottawa vs $10k to fly commercial first-class from South Africa. We would have been better off if she just went first class everywhere. I think they should all fly economy as long as it's my money they are using.

Lol, so now you are in favor of first class airfare?

With the government planes, depending on how many people are flying it can definitely be more economical than a bunch of first class tickets.

I don't! If I were your boss I would fire your a$$. Take vacations on your dime sh*thead, not mine!

You would be a pretty irrational boss, though that is already fairly obvious.

If a company is already going to fly me someone and back for business, why would they care if I decide to take a few vacation days or stay over the weekend and fly back later? It is no skin off their back.

Government business is not an excuse for overspending. It should in fact dictate the most frugal spending possible as it is from the public funds.

You are obviously within your right to have opinions on how government business should be done. That simply isn't a criminal matter though.

Once again....within rules made by those spending the money. You would fit right in I'm sure making rules that allow you to spend extravagantly and using public money for personal benefit. You just admitted you use your employer's money (and I guessing you work in govt so its my money) to fund your vacations.

Sorry, I forgot she bunked in her sister's spare room and ate KD every night. :roll:

Lol, I don't work for the government and it doesn't cost my employer anything extra when I decide to take some vacation days and fly back later on a business trip.

Sorry, I forgot she bunked in her sister's spare room and ate KD every night. :roll:

So you have no evidence of this?

 

[JLM]

Do you mean Mandala? She worked for him after he was released from jail back in the 90's as part of a team of lawyers helping him fight apartheid.

As for where the money went, here is the breakdown.

"— $14,992. Redford takes government plane to Ottawa to catch Prime Minister Stephen Harper's plane to South Africa.

— $10,000. Redford's assistant flies commercial to South Africa as he was not permitted on Harper plane.

— $20,000. Redford and assistant spend $10,000 each to take early commercial flight back from South Africa so premier can attend swearing-in of her new cabinet.

Total cost: $44,992"

Redford's Mandela Funeral Trip: A Breakdown Of The Costs

Yeah, I meant Mandela (typed it before I took my nap) $15000 for a plane from Edmonton to Ottawa????? and what did the asst. do to be persona non grata on Harper's plane? Now I do want to puke. That whole trip shouldn't have cost us more than a couple of Gs.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Lol, your being pretty nit picky for someone who thought they had a pension plan like 2 posts ago.

Pension plan / pension benefit, sounds like you're the nit-picky one. In reality it don't matter what you name it they still get pension funding from the citizens and pretty generous funding at that when the lowest paid person gets $22,500 a year. Redford would be in the $55-60k/yr bracket.

Sure, technically they can spend the money on whatever they want. That is the nature of not having a pension plan. They give you this money with the intention of you saving it for retirement, but in the end, you can do what you want with it and they have no obligation to do anything more for you if you squander it.

So now it is pension funding to you? Make up your mind.
No we are not obligated to do anything if they squander the money. I'm not sure it is really fair that we citizens should be obligated to between $22,500 and $60,000/year in contributions at all.

Lol, can you show me this contract you speak of?

Look under the Alberta Elections Act. You think there isn't defined rights and responsibilities to get the compensation package offered.

The fact is that she didn't breach any contract in this regard. There is no contract saying that if she spends more than people think is right, she gets all of her RRSP contributions clawed back.

She didn't fulfill her term therefore is in breach of contract and should be penalized for it. Having to give back any pension funds received and foot the bill for the severance of those underlings leaving with her might make anyone else think twice before doing anything that might make them resign or get fired.

Exactly what rule did Redford change that allowed her to do this?

Whether Redford enacted or amended any particular legislation regarding her compensation or code of ethics is irrelevant to the point. The point (not the one on the top of your head) is that we have a system where the rules and compensation for the MLAs are decided by the MLAs. Not sure why you cannot see the huge conflict of interest there or the great possibility for corruption and self-indulgence.

Sure, whatever. I don't care.

See, I even have your support as dictator! Thx

Lol, so now you are in favor of first class airfare?

No, I am in favor of the most economical spending of public funds. Given the choice between $14k to fly to Ottawa plus or $10K to fly to Johanasburg I'll pick the lower amount every time. Toss in the option of round trip business class for $5200 I'll pick that. Go the extra mile and look at $2600 return for economy class and guess how she is flying?

With the government planes, depending on how many people are flying it can definitely be more economical than a bunch of first class tickets.

Certainly if you are flying twenty or thirty people the govt plane is a far better option (though I would like to see a cost comparison with economy class) but this instance it wasn't. Are you getting it yet? I don't care if they charter the f*cking concord or space shuttle as long as it is the most economically viable option.

You would be a pretty irrational boss, though that is already fairly obvious.

Not irrational at all, very hard-a$$ed if you ain't cutting the mustard but really quite generous in compensation to staff who earn it.

If a company is already going to fly me someone and back for business, why would they care if I decide to take a few vacation days or stay over the weekend and fly back later? It is no skin off their back.

Great attitude! Have you ever looked into the fare differences for staying extra days or changing flights or whatever needs to be done so you can have a weekend in the sun? You seem to be pretty cavalier with the company checkbook...do you get them to spring for the hotel too. Do they fund your wife/girlfriend/boyfriend going along, her hotel bill? Do you use your expense acct to feed her if she is there? Do you dip into the mini-bar?

You are obviously within your right to have opinions on how government business should be done. That simply isn't a criminal matter though.

The only reason it isn't criminal is because they will never pass legislation that could make them criminals for the sh*t they believe they are entitled to.

Lol, I don't work for the government

It would seem you should, that is where you would normally find arrogant d*cks with gigantic sense of entitlement and no responsibility when spending other people's money.

So you have no evidence of this?

I don't know where she stayed but a solid guess would be it wasn't for free and we paid for it.

 

[JLM]

No, I am in favor of the most economical spending of public funds. Given the choice between $14k to fly to Ottawa plus or $10K to fly to Johanasburg I'll pick the lower amount every time. Toss in the option of round trip business class for $5200 I'll pick that. Go the extra mile and look at $2600 return for economy class and guess how she is flying?

Certainly if you are flying twenty or thirty people the govt plane is a far better option (though I would like to see a cost comparison with economy class) but this instance it wasn't. Are you getting it yet? I don't care if they charter the f*cking concord or space shuttle as long as it is the most economically viable option.



.

Wasn't there a kafuffle awhile back about Peter MacKay pulling some such bull sh*t? She probably figured if it was good enough for Peter it's good enough for here. No sense of reality.............there's children going hungry and waiting for life saving operations, as long as her a$$ is comfortable riding to Johannesburg!

 

[BornRuff]

Yeah, I meant Mandela (typed it before I took my nap) $15000 for a plane from Edmonton to Ottawa????? and what did the asst. do to be persona non grata on Harper's plane? Now I do want to puke. That whole trip shouldn't have cost us more than a couple of Gs.

The plane that the PM flew to the service had limited seating. Only one person from each federal opposition party was allowed on the plane, which is why Justin Trudeau didn't attend. He sent Irwin Cotler instead, since he personally worked with Mandela.

So it makes sense that they wouldn't necessarily have space for a premier's assistant either.

As for the cost of the flight to Ottawa, private jets are expensive. There is no getting around that fact.

 

[JLM]

The plane that the PM flew to the service had limited seating. Only one person from each federal opposition party was allowed on the plane, which is why Justin Trudeau didn't attend. He sent Irwin Cotler instead, since he personally worked with Mandela.

So it makes sense that they wouldn't necessarily have space for a premier's assistant either.

As for the cost of the flight to Ottawa, private jets are expensive. There is no getting around that fact.

Would there have been something wrong with her travelling the same way you or I would have gone?
If there wasn't any way she could have made that trip for about 2 grand or less, then she should have sent a condolence card.

 

[BornRuff]

Pension plan / pension benefit, sounds like you're the nit-picky one. In reality it don't matter what you name it they still get pension funding from the citizens and pretty generous funding at that when the lowest paid person gets $22,500 a year. Redford would be in the $55-60k/yr bracket.

So now it is pension funding to you? Make up your mind.
No we are not obligated to do anything if they squander the money. I'm not sure it is really fair that we citizens should be obligated to between $22,500 and $60,000/year in contributions at all.

When did I ever say the words "pension funding".

The facts are simple. They don't have a pension plan. I have already explained that to you.

Look under the Alberta Elections Act. You think there isn't defined rights and responsibilities to get the compensation package offered.

She didn't fulfill her term therefore is in breach of contract and should be penalized for it. Having to give back any pension funds received and foot the bill for the severance of those underlings leaving with her might make anyone else think twice before doing anything that might make them resign or get fired.

Come on. You must know that there is nothing in the elections act that supports your view.

Whether Redford enacted or amended any particular legislation regarding her compensation or code of ethics is irrelevant to the point. The point (not the one on the top of your head) is that we have a system where the rules and compensation for the MLAs are decided by the MLAs. Not sure why you cannot see the huge conflict of interest there or the great possibility for corruption and self-indulgence.

See, I even have your support as dictator! Thx

It obviously is important to you, since you have made a big deal about the fact that these people make their own rules.

No, I am in favor of the most economical spending of public funds. Given the choice between $14k to fly to Ottawa plus or $10K to fly to Johanasburg I'll pick the lower amount every time. Toss in the option of round trip business class for $5200 I'll pick that. Go the extra mile and look at $2600 return for economy class and guess how she is flying?

Certainly if you are flying twenty or thirty people the govt plane is a far better option (though I would like to see a cost comparison with economy class) but this instance it wasn't. Are you getting it yet? I don't care if they charter the f*cking concord or space shuttle as long as it is the most economically viable option.

The bolded "choice" is asinine since they are not comparable in any way.

Also, check those numbers for "round trip" airfare on Air Canada again. You clearly were only looking at one leg of the round trip. There is nothing on Air Canada round trip South Africa anywhere close to the numbers that you quote.

Not irrational at all, very hard-a$$ed if you ain't cutting the mustard but really quite generous in compensation to staff who earn it.

Great attitude! Have you ever looked into the fare differences for staying extra days or changing flights or whatever needs to be done so you can have a weekend in the sun? You seem to be pretty cavalier with the company checkbook...do you get them to spring for the hotel too. Do they fund your wife/girlfriend/boyfriend going along, her hotel bill? Do you use your expense acct to feed her if she is there? Do you dip into the mini-bar?

Lol, what the hell are you talking about? I clearly explained how one would take vacation days to extend a business trip. Obviously I never said that the company pays for anything over and above what they would pay for the business trip.

I am wondering if you have ever even had a job. How do you not understand this?

The only reason it isn't criminal is because they will never pass legislation that could make them criminals for the sh*t they believe they are entitled to.

It would seem you should, that is where you would normally find arrogant d*cks with gigantic sense of entitlement and no responsibility when spending other people's money.

We can easily pass laws to make specific things illegal. The problem you have is you can't even define what should be illegal. You are just mad and want to be able to take out your anger on the people you are mad at.

I don't know where she stayed but a solid guess would be it wasn't for free and we paid for it.

Do you honestly think that the news media and the opposition would have ignored any expenses that she claimed for anything else on that trip?

The PMO paid for the flight over there, as well as the accommodations and the food.

Would there have been something wrong with her travelling the same way you or I would have gone?
If there wasn't any way she could have made that trip for about 2 grand or less, then she should have sent a condolence card.

Honestly, I do not disagree that you are entitled to disagree with how she chooses to do her job. The simply fact is that disagreeing with how she does her job is in no way similar to her committing any sort of crime.

 

[JLM]

Lol, your being pretty nit picky for someone who thought they had a pension plan like 2 posts ago.

I don't know about the rest of Canada but in British Columbia, they are eligible for a pension for life after serving in an elected position for a minimum of six years to the best of my knowledge unless it's been recently changed! (and I think that would have made headlines, not to mention the shrill whining you'd hear) -

 

[BornRuff]

I don't know about the rest of Canada but in British Columbia, they are eligible for a pension for life after serving in an elected position for a minimum of six years to the best of my knowledge unless it's been recently changed! (and I think that would have made headlines, not to mention the shrill whining you'd hear) -

We have discussed this numerous times in this thread, so I would have hoped you would have seen this by now.

MLAs in Alberta do not have a pension plan. They get 13% of their salary given to them to put into their RRSP, and up to 3.25% more is matched if they also contribute that amount.

 

[JLM]

We have discussed this numerous times in this thread, so I would have hoped you would have seen this by now.

MLAs in Alberta do not have a pension plan. They get 13% of their salary given to them to put into their RRSP, and up to 3.25% more is matched if they also contribute that amount.

Sounds pretty generous to me. I was a gov't employee and we had to contribute 5% which the gov't matched!

 

[BornRuff]

Sounds pretty generous to me. I was a gov't employee and we had to contribute 5% which the gov't matched!

Certainly isn't bad, but not nearly the same thing as the defined benefit plans offered to some elected officials.

Just for my information, was the 5% a contribution into a defined benefit plan or a contribution into your RRSP?

 

[JLM]

Just for my information, was the 5% a contribution into a defined benefit plan or a contribution into your RRSP?

Superannuation.

 

[BornRuff]

Superannuation.

That can refer to a lot of different types of pensions.

If you plan is one where you are guaranteed some sort of regular payment until you die, then the whole 5%/5% contribution structure is a lot muddier.

The employer pretty much always ends up having to kick in a lot more to cover all of the administration costs and make up for shortfalls when they occur. You are a liability on their books until the day you die, sometimes longer if there is some sort of spousal benefit.

 

[JLM]

That can refer to a lot of different types of pensions.

If you plan is one where you are guaranteed some sort of regular payment until you die, then the whole 5%/5% contribution structure is a lot muddier.

The employer pretty much always ends up having to kick in a lot more to cover all of the administration costs and make up for shortfalls when they occur. You are a liability on their books until the day you die, sometimes longer if there is some sort of spousal benefit.

Yes and no, I'm likely to become a "thorn in their a$$" (keeping fingers, toes, eyes and ears crossed) as I've already been drawing the pension for 15 years and have slowed down very little (so far) since the day I started. But you don't want to kid yourself, they have access to all the actuaries and they can tell you pretty well down to the last person how many are going to live a year, two years, five years, twenty years, thirty years etc. They just don't know for sure which ones. Since I retired three of my workmates have bit the dust, one before he even got a chance to retire, so he is in part subsidizing me (poetic justice, as he in fact was a lazy f*cker)- Also you must remember in my case as in most that money had been invested for an average period of 15-17 years and back in the early days of my employment that investment was earning up to 25% per annum. Nope the employer is also a beneficiary. They are not stupid and they are not in the habit of giving money away. Oh yeah, you mention spousal benefit, well, she's five years younger than me and even healthier. -

 

[BornRuff]

Yes and no, I'm likely to become a "thorn in their a$$" (keeping fingers, toes, eyes and ears crossed) as I've already been drawing the pension for 15 years and have slowed down very little (so far) since the day I started. But you don't want to kid yourself, they have access to all the actuaries and they can tell you pretty well down to the last person how many are going to live a year, two years, five years, twenty years, thirty years etc. They just don't know for sure which ones. Since I retired three of my workmates have bit the dust, one before he even got a chance to retire, so he is in part subsidizing me (poetic justice, as he in fact was a lazy f*cker)- Also you must remember in my case as in most that money had been invested for an average period of 15-17 years and back in the early days of my employment that investment was earning up to 25% per annum. Nope the employer is also a beneficiary. They are not stupid and they are not in the habit of giving money away. Oh yeah, you mention spousal benefit, well, she's five years younger than me and even healthier. -

I get what you are saying, but the situation with pensions is kind of self evident. Defined benefit plans are extremely expensive.

That is why so many companies are abandoning them in favor of defined contribution approaches, and why most of the remaining plans are in funding shortfalls.

 

[JLM]

I get what you are saying, but the situation with pensions is kind of self evident. Defined benefit plans are extremely expensive.

That is why so many companies are abandoning them in favor of defined contribution approaches, and why most of the remaining plans are in funding shortfalls.

If they are it's their own damn fault, they didn't have to foresight to realize with advances in modern medicine people were going to start living longer.

 

[BornRuff]

If they are it's their own damn fault, they didn't have to foresight to realize with advances in modern medicine people were going to start living longer.

There are lots of reasons. Recently the stock market also took a huge toll on pension funds. Many companies were crippled by massive payments that they had to make into their pension funds when a big chunk of the money disappeared in the market crash.

It isn't about assigning blame. It is a simple factual matter that employers generally end up paying a lot more than just the 5% or 10% contribution that they match.

 

[JLM]

There are lots of reasons. Recently the stock market also took a huge toll on pension funds. Many companies were crippled by massive payments that they had to make into their pension funds when a big chunk of the money disappeared in the market crash.

It isn't about assigning blame. It is a simple factual matter that employers generally end up paying a lot more than just the 5% or 10% contribution that they match.

My superannuation plan sends a financial report every year and every year so far it's been pretty rosy. Mind you they are pretty cautious, probably investing it in fixed income funds more than equities (which is very smart when investing other people's money) with your own on average you'll do a bit better in equities.

 

[Trex]

Former premier Alison Redford's nine staffers leave with $1.3 million in severance | Alberta | News | Calgary Sun

Actually no, nothing too much does have to change.
It all works quite well thank you very much.

Our country and with it our political and legal systems are the envy of the vast majority of the worlds population.
The few people who were lucky enough to be born in the rich and privileged "western world" are the envy of the of rest of the planets population.
Our western democratic institutions are a thing of wonder to a couple of billion of folks who suffer under repressive or seriously flawed systems of governance.
That is not to say our systems of government cannot be improved or modified to better serve future generations.
Nor does it excuse those Canadians who try to take advantage of others for personal gain.

Try visiting India, Russia, China, the Middle East, Cuba or Africa and befriending the locals.
See what it is like to be constantly pestered to smuggle in unavailable or unaffordable pharmaceuticals for sick kids and other local family members.
Or even un-replaceable car or electronic parts that we can pick up for pennies at the local Canadian Tire.
I have.

Most folks have no clue how lucky they really are.
Anyone that claims they could easily " run the country and still have time for 18 holes" is simply showing their ignorance.

Unhappy with Canadian politics?
Here’s a hint or two.
Attend all municipal, provincial and federal local "town hall" meetings.
Make your views known when asked.

Make a point of voicing any concerns or issues you may have to your local MLA or MP and then politely request a response.

Vote in every single municipal, provincial and federal election with out fail.
Unhappy with all the candidates? Spoil your vote.

Pick a party and join it, attend leadership elections.

Try working in a local election campaign office for the candidate of your choice.
Nothing like door knocking and or working in the war-room to open ones eyes.

Still unhappy?
Try running for local election yourself and see how you do.

You get out what you put in.
Simple as that.

 

[BornRuff]

My superannuation plan sends a financial report every year and every year so far it's been pretty rosy. Mind you they are pretty cautious, probably investing it in fixed income funds more than equities (which is very smart when investing other people's money) with your own on average you'll do a bit better in equities.

The government pension plans are fine because they have a very strong backer, i.e. the taxpayers.